Manslaughter charge for Angwin mom whose baby died when left in car

Home » News » Local

Judge overturns previous decision to drop charges

Wednesday, February 13, 2008

Comment

By MARSHA DORGAN
Napa Valley Register

Infant left in car for six hours, May 21, 2007

Angwin mother charged with involuntary manslaughter, Aug. 25, 2007

Mom pleads not guilty in baby's death, Oct. 4, 2007

Judge tosses charge against Angwin mom in baby's death, Oct. 17, 2007

Baby dies in Angwin after being left in car, May 19, 2007

1 p.m.

The Angwin mom whose 10-month old daughter died when left in the family car will face a felony involuntary manslaughter charge in connection with the child’s death.

Napa County Superior Court Judge Diane Price this morning overruled a previous court finding by Judge Stephen Kroyer that insufficient evidence existed to charge Haley Wesley, 27, in her daughter Maddison’s death.

At Wesley’s preliminary hearing last October, Kroyer ruled the baby’s death was an incredible, horrible mistake and Wesley had no criminal intent in Maddison’s death.

In November, the district attorney’s office filed a motion with the court asking the charge against Wesley be reinstated, claiming Kroyer had erred in his ruling.

After several court continuances, Price granted the prosecution’s request on Wednesday.

If found guilty, Wesley could face a maximum of six years in jail.

Check here later in the day for more on this story.

44 comment(s)

cathyodom wrote on Feb 13, 2008 1:49 PM:

" I think she's paid enough and the charges should be dropped. "

Mr. Burns wrote on Feb 13, 2008 1:53 PM:

" I think this was the right decision. The mother should face manslaughter charges since she accidentally caused the death of another person. All the arguments that she did not intend to harm her baby are irrelevant -- that would be murder -- this is manslaughter, plain and simple. "

tgrl707 wrote on Feb 13, 2008 2:22 PM:

" what a horrible and sad situation for everyone involved. it is unfortunate this woman has to indure being in the public eye when she should be mourning in private. i feel this was a situation that could have been avoided if more cautious steps were taken, however i think that consequences are appropriate as well. what kind of message would be sent if nothing were to happen? does that mean that each time a childs life is lost because we "forgot" they were in the car then it's ok? such a tragedy!! "

steph wrote on Feb 13, 2008 2:27 PM:

" I'm sorry about this decision. I'm with cathyodom here--she's suffered greatly and punishing Wesley further will not be constructive. How sad on so many levels. Yes, she's responsible, yes, it's her fault, and yes, it was a terrible and tragic accident. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone here. I expect many horrid replies from ugly-hearted people, but I feel Wesley has suffered enough and further punishment will not serve anyone. "

GregN. wrote on Feb 13, 2008 2:40 PM:

" For all you people in these blogs that say "Where are the parents?", here she is, take her or leave her. :-) "

Mr. Burns wrote on Feb 13, 2008 2:49 PM:

" steph, it's not that people who think she should face charges are "ugly-hearted," it's that we believe the courts are the best place to carry out justice, not the court of public opinion. Don't you think it would set a bad precedent if she were let off the hook due to having "felt bad enough for long enoough" about her alleged crime? "

Mr. Burns wrote on Feb 13, 2008 2:50 PM:

" Touche, GregN! "

NVGal wrote on Feb 13, 2008 3:24 PM:

" This isn’t about the mother and how much she has suffered. This is about a tiny little girl who didn’t even make it to her first birthday, a tiny baby that could not take care of herself and left to die a horrible death. This baby needs an advocate now in her death, as she needed someone to be there for her in her short life. Let the mother have her day in court, this little girl deserves at least that. "

hudds5 wrote on Feb 13, 2008 3:27 PM:

" Her punishment will serve as a reminder to those who don't have enough common sense to watch over their children properly. "

Dwayne wrote on Feb 13, 2008 4:11 PM:

" Since when does stupidity indicate criminal intent? The prosecutor is going to ply the emotions of the jury to get what he wants, instead of the facts. If stupidity warrants prosecution, then we ought to start rounding up lot of idiots. Easy pickings for a DA who needs an easy notch in his belt. "

nan03 wrote on Feb 13, 2008 4:52 PM:

" I am so glad that they are at long last doing something about this. Maybe now other mothers will wake up and take care of their babys that can't take caare of their slef. "

Mr. Burns wrote on Feb 13, 2008 5:54 PM:

" Dwayne, the absence of criminal intent is fundamental to the charge of manslaughter. If there were criminal intent, it would be murder. Why do people have such a hard time with this? "

Dwayne wrote on Feb 13, 2008 7:25 PM:

" I don't know, Mr. Burns. Why are people being prosecuted for being stupid? Think that will make them smarter? Reality check.... "

Mamyt wrote on Feb 13, 2008 7:30 PM:

" My opinion is the same now as it was in October " There is no possible way for any one except the mother to know if this was intentional or accidental. I think this accidental death should be treated the same as other accidental deaths. If you are day dreaming and speed through a neighborhood and accidentally hit a child what is the legal consequence? I think this should be treated exactly the same way whatever the courts have set as their standard for accidental deaths. I think this mother should be given some punishment if for no other reason than to let others know this is NOT an option to get rid of an obstacle. If there is no legal recourse what will keep the crazies from saying “If he is going to pay more attention to the baby than me then I will just get rid of the baby, I know I can accidentally leave it in the car and no one will be able to prove other wise, and I know I won’t be punished because they don’t punish for that accident”. "

GetReal! wrote on Feb 13, 2008 8:08 PM:

" Making an example out of this woman will help society, how? Advocating for the dead baby will accomplish what? You people that are thirsting for vengence are part of what is wrong with our society, on a global level. I would hope that each of you that are hungry to prosecute this case are not professing to be Christians. If that is the case I see where your inability to have a forgiving spirit is grounded. Eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow you will die! "

Mr. Burns wrote on Feb 13, 2008 8:21 PM:

" Dwayne, stupidity has nothing to do with it. Nor does intent. People are being prosecuted for causing the death of another. Are you arguing that should not be a crime? "

vocal-de-local wrote on Feb 13, 2008 8:36 PM:

" It would be interesting to see how similar cases are treated in California? Do most of them result in manslaughter charges? I wouldn't want to see this mother punished excessively, but on the other hand, I wouldn't expect someone to get off easier than those who have committed the same act. "

Amelia wrote on Feb 13, 2008 10:34 PM:

" Being a mother of two, I thank God that this has never happened to me. I know that it could have just because my mind is on everything that a mother has to do in her daily life. I believe that this was a accident and not criminally intended as some of you on here believe. Punishment? yes. But don't you think that she's doing just that? Probably more than any court can give her. and for those of you casting stones, what if this was your family member? Your sister, best friend.... don't judge too harshly. You never know when you will be written about. "

Joe wrote on Feb 13, 2008 11:13 PM:

" Why do people insist on someone having to pay for a tragic accident that happened? That is what is wrong with this country, everyone always wants someone to pay. In some cases the wrong person is charged because people want to blame somebody so bad that they convict the wrong person. That's not the case here. If she were rich I'm sure she could buy her way out. Rich people do that all the time and people don't complain. Ted Kennedy was drunk and crashed his car into a river killing his girlfriend. His father payed for him to get out of it. So it really isn't a matter of learning a lesson. "

asahigo wrote on Feb 14, 2008 12:51 AM:

" Now this, this comment has got me wondering.... Minutes before Ms. Wesley parked her car and got out, leaving the baby in the back seat, her baby was crying If that is indeed true, then she should be found guilty of manslaughter. I don't see any reasonable mother forgetting that her child was crying just minutes ago. GetReal! you said Advocating for the dead baby will accomplish what? Advocating for a dead child tells the world that we as a society will not stand by when an innocent child dies. There will be an investigation, and if upon conclusion of said investigation criminal charges are filed, we have the courage to file them. "

Dwayne wrote on Feb 14, 2008 7:10 AM:

" There's quite a difference between a tragedy and a crime. Ask yourself, what is to be gained by victimizing the Mother again by punishing her? Our 'zero tolerance' is out of control. What have we become to feel the need to kick someone when they are down... "

kbf wrote on Feb 14, 2008 8:12 AM:

" I raised 6 children and never did I ever forget one of my kids, in the car, at school or anywhere else. A parent should always have their child at the front of their thoughts always no matter where their are going or what car they are driving. I think everyone would agree she didn't intend to hurt the baby but it happened and someone needs to be held accountable in some way. "

NVGal wrote on Feb 14, 2008 9:37 AM:

" This isn't about punishing the mother, this is about valuing a life. That a life is more important in our society than the feelings of the person that cut it short, whether intentionally or not. If this mother was careless and caused the baby's death, the baby has a right to be vindicated. All life has value, and the tremendous pain and suffering of the mother doesn't get to trump a careless ending of a child's life. This mother gets her day in court and can defend herself, she has all her supporters. But who is supporting the baby in her death? That is the tragedy. "

Dwayne wrote on Feb 14, 2008 9:53 AM:

" Right. A mob mentality and a virtual lynching will make some you feel much better, won't it. And that will deter someone else from making the same stupid mistake? Perhaps if this was Britaney Spears I would agree. "

NVGal wrote on Feb 14, 2008 10:28 AM:

" Don’t ignore the rights of the child. It’s easy to relate to the mother, she probably is caring and kind and loved her baby. She is someone’s friend, sister, daughter. But justifying her actions because you can understand them and relate to them devalues and degrades the life of a 10 month old. This baby was a niece, a daughter, but never had the chance to become a friend, a wife or a mother. A tragic accident or a careless mistake, let the jury decide. But whatever the decision, this child has a right to be heard in her death. We all do. The mistake here are the labels, if it was just a tragic accident, she is a good mother with room for forgiveness, but if she was careless and convicted, she is a horrible mother and has no rights to forgiveness. To some standing up and admitting that you made a mistake and were careless and caused the death of someone in your care that you loved is unforgivable. But to me that is a real mother, and real mothers are always worthy of forgiveness. "

steph wrote on Feb 14, 2008 10:42 AM:

" Ohhhh...I get it now. If only the mother had known she could face charges and go to jail, THEN she wouldn't have had this accident. I see now. Let's go for blood. "

steph wrote on Feb 14, 2008 11:09 AM:

" Mr. Burns, it's not about her remorse, it's about her intent. She should face charges, and she did face charges in front of the first judge. Not sure why she had to go through a second trial. As for those perfect mothers who are writing in saying, "I would NEVER..." well, good for you. I'd love to see just how perfectly your children turned out. The rest of us don't claim to be so perfect, and we have a sense of compassion and forgiveness when an accident is involved. If the woman was grossly negligent, using drugs, intentionally placing her child in harm's way, then she needs a psych evaluation and treatment (she might anyway.) But no sane mother harms her baby on purpose. "

seventhnapan wrote on Feb 14, 2008 11:32 AM:

" I can't believe people are taking the attitude that it's fine to let this go to a trial, because she'll be acquitted if she's innocent. She will almost certainly be acquitted, but that won't save her from the legal fees, the public humiliation of a trial, or the daily re-hashing of the worst tragedy of her life. If there were a history of negligence or even a hint of intent, I would feel differently, but the charges are based on the very widest, vaguest definition of manslaughter, and an interpretation of it so tenuous that one judge already threw it out. The district attorney should be ashamed. "

Mr. Burns wrote on Feb 14, 2008 2:49 PM:

" steph, the reason the first judge gave for tossing the manslaughter charge was the lack of criminal intent. Read up on the definition of manslaughter and you will see why this defied all logic, just like a lot of the arguments here. "

GetReal! wrote on Feb 14, 2008 3:10 PM:

" That's right Burns, you and the ones that agree with you are the bright ones. Honorable Kroyer and those of us that agree with his decision have know idea what we are saying. We must stick to the "letter of the law" even where compassion is a stake.
Society may persuade a criminal for committing further crimes by handing down harsh penalties. But society can never prevent honest mistakes and accidents from happening. A show of support, encouragement and compassion would, on the other hand, prevent much of the pain so prevalent today. "

ephemerol wrote on Feb 14, 2008 4:32 PM:

" There are many charged and loaded issues all collapsed into one primary, surreal and tragic event here. Trying to discuss any of this is nearly impossible at this point. I do wish, hope and pray that some day our "legal system" which is so political by way of who is in a position of power at any one given time etc. will be transformed into a more wiser and smarter and more humane and forward thinking system. This matter should be carefully studied and examined over along period of time, carefully and systematically, by an entire group of psychologists and legal investigators skilled in detecting lying and deceit and then an only then should there carefully researched opinions be sent to prosecutor for a careful and well thought out review. What I personally desire in these matters is the "truth" of this tragedy and nightmare vs. inept and bungling prosecutors or police, greedy power tripping lawyers and prosecutors and a voracious pandering press at times.

Having said all of this I have spotted children left alone in parked hulking SUV's here locally, during heat waves and I have called them in to the local PD more than once. All prospective parents single or other wise would be well served to attend the *best* classes in child rearing, safety and much more before giving birth. It's far too demanding, complex and serious an endeavor to just blunder into and attempt to just bluff one's self though with. I hope we see some wisdom prevail with all of this vs. blind hysteria, posturing and the usual mania that follows such terrible un-witnessed deaths. "

Mr. Burns wrote on Feb 14, 2008 6:29 PM:

" GetReal, I agree that we could use more compassion in this world, starting with all of us for the mother in this situation. Another way we could show compassion is not to assume people who don't share your religion have no ability to forgive or feel compassion toward others. "

spatulabetty wrote on Feb 14, 2008 8:43 PM:

" Is it not enough that this family lost their baby because of a terrible tragedy? Is it not enough that they have already been put on trial once? Is it not enough that her name has been published, and that people look on her with scorn when they find out who she is? Is it not enough that even without that very public lashing she will forever remember that it was her fault that her precious child is gone from this world? What does putting this family through another trial accomplish, really? "

vocal-de-local wrote on Feb 14, 2008 10:13 PM:

" GetReal, I agree with Mr. Burns about the assumption that those who don't share your religion lack the ability to forgive. Some of the most forgiving and gentle people I have ever met are non Christians. As the Dalai Lama says, "Whether one believes in a religion or not, and whether one believes in rebirth or not, there isn't anyone who doesn't appreciate kindness and compassion". "

GetReal! wrote on Feb 15, 2008 3:03 PM:

" Hmmmm...Rather that arguing in favor of the compassion offered by other religions, why not show it by your own words, thoughts and actions? If your own daughter or sister, was living through the torment of loosing her own baby, regardless of the fact that she made the mistake, could you actually believe that that isn't enough punishment for her? If your answer is yes, please tell me what religion teaches that. My religion teaches that an "eye for an eye" was a doctrine of the old covenant, but has been replaced with "love your enemies, do good to those who persecute you and abuse you."
This little baby is in better hands, can't we just leave it at that? "

NVGal wrote on Feb 15, 2008 4:19 PM:

" Getreal, wanting this case to go to trial isn’t lacking compassion for the mother, it is searching for the truth in a baby’s death. If the mother’s carelessness caused this death, looking the other way isn’t compassion, it is irresponsibility. "

GetReal! wrote on Feb 16, 2008 3:48 PM:

" NVGal; I don't know the mother. But if it is truth you are after, I'm pretty sure I can fill you in, just by what I have read. Are you ready???
The mothers carelessness caused her precious daughters death. Now what? Keep on searching and spending tax payer money? Prosecute her because, after all, we wouldn't want her to be a repeat offender? Make an example out of her so that no other person would ever consider making a careless mistake? Perhaps she should have her tubes tied or be given a hysterectomy to protect any other child she might pro-create in the future? I don't know, maybe she doesn't realize just how horrific her careless action was, perhaps we should bring it all up again in court, be sure to have witnesses such as yourself to lam bast her? We certainly must do what is responsible in your sight, for the safety of all children, because who knows what evil parent may make the next careless accident. God bless Honorable Kroyer. "

vocal-de-local wrote on Feb 18, 2008 8:05 PM:

" Let me remind you, GetReal, that you were the first one to address the subject of religion on this post. Why should I forbid myself from defending those who are non Christian when you have gone out of your way to insult them? To suggest that those who are non Christian lack a forgiving spirit and only have the capacity to "eat, drink, and be merry" is an insult to the numerous religious and non religious organizations and individuals who reach out and exhibit compassion for others. I do not believe that just because a person professes to be Christian, or anything else for that matter, that the law should bend the rules in any way. I believe that this particular case should be evaluated in relationship to how comparable cases have been handled in California, not on whether a person is Christian or not. "

GetReal! wrote on Feb 19, 2008 7:05 AM:

" v-d-l, first of all my basic assumption is that at least some of the posters who appear to be in favor of conviction are Christian. My point is that they are not conveying a Christian spirit. As for whether people of other religions and the non religious, if they are more compassionate than the Christians, do tell. It is becoming increasingly obvious to me that Christians are not living up to what they profess to be, on many issues. I think it is time for many Christians to realize that their claim is just that. The word hypocrite comes to mind. Might I remind you that we, the posters, are not the law. We can hope that those who actually make the decisions will read our comments and, in the case of my comments, show a some sympathy and compassion. "

vocal-de-local wrote on Feb 19, 2008 3:00 PM:

" Getreal, on a personal level, I hope this mother isn't further penalized. My sister and I had a discussion about this case just last night and she reminded me of the time she jumped into her car, backed out with her other kids in the car, and drove off to another town before realizing she left her young toddler at home alone. She is VERY luck she did not back into this child on her way out because he was outside wandering around the yard when she arrived home. My sister was horrified. We do live busy lives today and unfortunately bad things do happen as a result which are not intentional. My sister is an overly protective parent BTW and you would never guess in a million years that this could happen to her. I doubt there is a parent out there who has not had a close call of some sort or another. My toddler son escaped out the garage door once when I was resting for less than ten minutes. I didn't think he could walk well enough quite yet to escape like that. I ran outside and saw him running down the MIDDLE of the street. He was at the corner by the time I caught up with him. A car could have so easily come around the blind corner and not seen him because he was so small. A ton of stones would have been thrown at me if anything had happened to him that day. Raising kids is risky business no matter how protective and loving you are. Bad things happen sometimes that are not intentional. This mother will need to maintain her composure and face the court system, though. She will get through it and life will move her beyond this pain. "

NVGal wrote on Feb 19, 2008 5:46 PM:

" GetReal – the mother is a victim of her own making. To argue that we shouldn’t prosecute her because it doesn’t do anyone any good, don’t you have to argue that the entire system is flawed? Why then prosecute a DUI felony? Why then prosecute someone who uses drugs? But your argument is that to prosecute her it isn’t a Christian thing to do. AKA “sweep it under the rug” or “look the other way” theory. They have tried this in a “Christian” church, it didn’t go over very well. "

GetReal! wrote on Feb 19, 2008 6:20 PM:

" v-d-l, I too have had my share of careless mishaps. Fortunately, non quite so dire as this mother. Growing up with four siblings...we had our share of close calls, even a few emergency room visits. I have learned that the golden rule, "do unto others as you would have them do unto you," is as healthy for the receiver as it is for the giver. You may be atheist, Muslim or any other religion, it doesn't matter to me, if you practice this principle you are alright in my book! "

opiniagirl wrote on Feb 20, 2008 9:29 AM:

" She is not being retried to send message. It is not possible to "send a message" to people that they are not allowed to "forget". How does that make since? This mom "forget" her child and it ended in the most horrifying way a story could end; however it's not people will be driving along in the future and say to themselves before "forgeting" well I better not "forget" to remember that I'm not allowed to "forget"??? It makes no since. This is about (for the court) justice for the death of this child, which they are going tot have a hard time proving with no motive. "

vocal-de-local wrote on Feb 20, 2008 1:14 PM:

" It's not really up to us posters to decide how this case should be resolved in the court system. Our words should not play any role in legal decision making, and if they do, something is terribly wrong. That said, since we are all aware that our personal opinions posted here do not affect legal outcome, shouldn't we express a little more compassion rather than kicking a person who has already fallen to the ground? "

Join the conversation

*Member ID:
*Password:
Remember login? (requires cookies)
	Forgot Your Password?

Create an account

Comment Guidelines

The goal of the story comments section at NapaValleyRegister.com is to have an open, thought-provoking, civil community forum for all issues.

What gets your comment posted?

• Staying on topic

• Keeping your comment to 300 words or less

• Avoiding name-calling

• Addressing your comments to the message rather than the messenger

What gets your comment deleted?

• Personal attacks

• Derogatory remarks

• Name-calling of any sort

• Going off-topic

• Hate speech

• Racially-insensitive comments

• Implying guilt of a subject in a crime story before there is a court verdict

• Posting e-mail addresses

• Posting comments of a commercial nature

• POSTING WITH ALL CAPITAL LETTERS

• Linking multiple comments together with "to be continued..." to get around the 300 word limit.

The fine print

- Comments are either approved or denied. We do not edit comments.

- You are welcome to modify and resubmit a denied comment.

- Comments may take several hours to be posted.

- Comments posted are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of NapaValleyRegister.com, its employees or its parent company.

- Do you have information on a story? Please go to our virtual newsroom to send us a news tip.

- If you feel a posted comment has violated our guidelines, please contact online@napanews.com or add a comment indicating you have an issue and our moderators will review the comment in question.

Search: